4.8 Review

Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-mass spectrometry of hydrophobic proteins in mixtures using formic acid, perfluorooctanoic acid, and sorbitol

Journal

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
Volume 79, Issue 3, Pages 1115-1125

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ac061916c

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Three MALDI-MS sample/matrix preparation approaches were evaluated for their ability to enhance hydrophobic protein detection from complex mixtures: (1) formic acid-based formulations, (2) perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) surfactant addition, and (3) sorbitol addition. While MALDI-MS of Escherichia coli cells desorbed from a standard sinapinic acid matrix displayed 94 (M + H)(+) ions, 119 were observed from a formic acid-based matrix with no more than 10 common to both. Formic acid matrix revealed many lipoproteins and an 8282 m/z ion proposed to be the abundant, water-insoluble ATPase proteolipid. Among the formic acid-based cocktails examined, the slowest rate of serine/threonine formylation was found for 50% H2O/33% 2-propanol/17% formic acid. Faster formylation was observed from cocktails containing more formic acid and from mixtures including CH3CN. Sinapinic, ferulic, DHB, 4-hydroxybenzylidene malononitrile, and 2-mercaptobenzothiazole matrixes performed well in formic acid formulations. Dramatic differences in mixture spectra were also observed from PFOA/sinapinic acid, at detergent concentrations exceeding the critical micelle concentration, although these matrix cocktails proved difficult to crystallize. E. coli ions observed from these matrix conditions are listed in Tables S-1 and S-3 (Supporting Information). Similar complementarity was observed for M. acetivorans whole-cell mixtures. Including sorbitol in the sinapinic acid matrix was found to promote homogeneous crystallization and to enhance medium and higher m/z ion detection from dilute E. coli cellular mixtures.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available